W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > July 2001

Re: HTML ID case question

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 13:19:18 +0200
Message-ID: <006201c10ac4$7e4b0cc0$80f5a8c0@cwi.nl>
To: "Terje Bless" <link@tss.no>
Cc: "Eric Meyer" <emeyer@netscape.com>, <beppe@netscape.com>, "HTML WG" <w3c-html-wg@w3.org>, <www-validator@w3.org>
From: "Terje Bless" <link@tss.no>
> Valid HTML that is labelled Invalid by the Validator
> is a Very Very Bad Thing.

The HTML in question is invalid and the validator correctly says so.

> I would suggest a note to the effect that "This makes no sense whatsoever;
> don't worry about it or you'll get a migraine" in relevant parts of the
> spec; if it isn't possible to disambiguate the rules in a proper fashion.

Actually it does make sense, as Jonny pointed out. It was a very reasonable
solution to a sticky problem: two non-interoperating browsers, neither of
whom were willing to be declared broken. The specification as it is now
means that both browsers work identically on conforming documents. In brief
the spec says: IDs are case-sensitive, but you are not allowed to write a
document that depends on it.

It is not the perfect solution in an ideal world, but in the world we have
inherited, it is an elegant solution for a sticky problem.

Best wishes,

Steven Pemberton
Chair, HTML WG
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 07:20:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:59 GMT